[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 83 (Wednesday, June 12, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H3333-H3341]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
General Leave
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous material on H.R. 1960.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Webster of Florida). Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 256 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1960.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack) to
preside over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 1735
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 1960) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for
military activities of the Department of Defense and for military
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes, with Mr. Womack in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
The gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Smith) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1960, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, which overwhelmingly passed the
Committee on Armed Services. In keeping with the committee's tradition
of bipartisanship, Ranking Member Smith and I worked collaboratively to
produce this bill and solicited input from each of our members. We've
already adopted 169 amendments during markup and look forward to a
robust debate the remainder of the week on the floor.
The legislation advances our national security objectives, provides
support and logistical resources for our warfighters, and helps the
United States confront the national security challenges of the 21st
century. The bill authorizes $552.1 billion for national defense in the
base budget. It also authorizes another $85.8 billion for Overseas
Contingency Operations, consistent with the House budget, and the bill
contains no earmarks.
Of critical importance, the bill takes serious and significant steps
to end the crisis of sexual assault in our military. This includes
stripping the commanders of their authority to dismiss a finding by a
court-martial; prohibiting commanders from reducing guilty findings to
lesser offenses; establishing minimum sentencing requirements for
sexual assault; extending whistleblower protections to those who report
rape, sexual assault, or other sexual misconduct; and other vital
measures. Based on the years of work and oversight our committee has
done on this critical issue, I share Senator Levin's reluctance to
remove the commander from the decision process for crimes under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice. The only way to change the culture is
to hold commanders responsible and accountable for their actions and
decisions.
[[Page H3334]]
Elsewhere in the bill, despite historic cuts to our Armed Forces, we
prevent military readiness shortfalls from becoming a readiness
emergency. We restore flying hours for the Army and Air Force
squadrons, direct money to help reset equipment returning from
Afghanistan, and relieve some of the military's maintenance backlogs.
The bill also provides our warfighters with resources and authorities
they need to win the war in Afghanistan and to pressure al Qaeda and
its affiliates. We fully fund a series of important authorities that
support the transition in Afghanistan and U.S. national security
interests. However, we prohibit the use of the majority of those funds
until the Secretary of Defense certifies that U.S. priorities have been
accommodated in a bilateral security agreement.
{time} 1740
We have made controlling costs a top priority. However, the mark
guards against achieving false, short-term savings at the expense of
vital, long-term strategic capabilities. For example, we prohibit the
premature retirement of Navy cruisers and amphibious assault ships,
critical vessels that are vital to the Pacific-focused strategy. The
bill also continues investments in oversight for key systems while
preserving our capacity to meet future challenges.
The bill continues our care for our warfighters, veterans and their
families with the support they earned through their service; and it
mandates fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability within
the Department of Defense.
The bill reduces the number of general officer billets and works to
end redundancies in military headquarters and task forces.
For 51 straight years, the National Defense Authorization Act has
been passed and signed into law. Congress has no higher responsibility
than to provide for the common defense. And with that in mind, I look
forward to passing this bill for the 52nd consecutive year.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
I want to thank Chairman McKeon and the entire committee--and most
importantly the staff. It's always this time of year when our staff
never sleeps and does an amazing job of pulling this bill together.
We, once again, worked in a very bipartisan fashion, worked the bill
through the process--a series of hearings, the markup last week. I
thank the chairman for his excellent leadership in continuing that
bipartisan tradition in the hopes of, for the 52nd straight year,
getting our bill done. So I appreciate working with him and with all
the members of the committee and the staff.
This bill, overall, sets the right priorities, I believe. It makes
sure that our military is funded and that our troops get the equipment
and support that they need to carry out the missions that we ask them
to do. That is something General Dempsey says all the time: We'll do
whatever you ask us to do; just make sure that you provide us with the
resources to do it.
Whatever missions we as policymakers decide the military should
perform, it's our obligation to make sure that it's funded. I believe
this bill does that. It particularly prioritizes Special Operations
Forces, intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance, and the kind of
equipment that we will need to confront the terrorist asymmetric
threats that are so central to our challenges right now on national
security.
As the chairman mentioned, it also takes steps on the sexual assault
problem. I will say that no piece of legislation is going to fix this.
The military needs to change its culture and prioritize the protection
of the men and women in our service. This legislation will help,
certainly; but this is a huge crisis right now that the military has
not yet stepped up to. I think it is one of the most important
challenges that we face in national security.
This piece of legislation also recognizes that we are still at war.
It funds the ongoing effort in Afghanistan to make sure that our troops
have the support that they need to carry out that mission.
However, there are a couple of things in the bill that I am concerned
about. I believe that we do need to close Guantanamo, and I have an
amendment before the Rules Committee which hopefully will be made in
order that will set us on a process to do that. I agree with people who
say that we can't simply close it tomorrow, we need a plan. My
amendment would require that the President come up with such a plan in
60 days and implement it as soon as possible.
I continue to be concerned that the President has the power to
indefinitely detain any person captured in the United States who is
designated to be an enemy combatant. That is a level of executive power
that I do not think is necessary; And as we have seen in recent weeks,
people are growing concerned about the amount of power the executive
branch has. Again, I will have an amendment to try to change that as
well.
Lastly, it is worth mentioning--sequestration. This bill is marked to
a level that assumes sequestration will not happen. I think that's
appropriate. That's where we're at and what we have to do, but it
points up the challenge of sequestration. If sequestration happens,
this bill is going to have to be cut by between $40 billion and $50
billion. Where would that money come from? How would we make that work?
Especially the way sequestration works, mindless, across-the-board
cuts. Because the sad truth is that's the likely outcome. There is no
pathway out of sequestration that we've seen. I thank the chairman for
his leadership in continually bringing home how important this is, but
we haven't gotten there yet. We need to keep emphasizing that.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the vice chairman of the Armed Services Committee, the
chairman of the Subcommittee on Intelligence, Emerging Threats and
Capabilities, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thornberry).
Mr. THORNBERRY. I appreciate the chairman yielding.
I think the first thing that should be said is that it is a
tremendous credit to the chairman and the ranking member that we are
where we are today. It may be true that for 51 straight years a defense
authorization bill has been signed into law, but that doesn't make it
easy to do number 52.
There are still a number of complex and even some controversial
issues. And so to have this bill before us today coming out of the
committee on a vote that is so strong I think is truly a credit to the
leadership of the chairman and the ranking member and the staff who
have worked very well together.
I also want to express particular appreciation to the ranking member
on our subcommittee, Mr. Langevin, because that, too, has been a
partnership in dealing with a number of complex issues, including
Special Operations, cybersecurity, science and technology, and military
intelligence issues.
One of the key priorities for us on this subcommittee has been
oversight. If you think back 2 years ago, in this bill we instituted a
quarterly reporting requirement for certain counterterrorism operations
involving Special Operations. Last year, we had a quarterly reporting
requirement on cyber operations. This year, in the full committee mark,
is a reporting requirement involving sensitive military operations,
including lethal and capture operations that is designed for oversight
before, just after, and, in a broader sense, after these events have
occurred. Oversight is a critically important part of everything the
committee does, especially in these complex areas.
There are a number of other provisions, Mr. Chairman, dealing with
military intelligence, cyber, Special Operations, and science and
technology that take important steps forward in helping this country to
be safer.
I will note I find it strange, the administration seems to oppose
requiring the Defense Clandestine Service to focus its collection on
defense priorities. That is what we require in this bill, and for some
reason that gives the administration heartburn. I hope we can continue
to have conversations with them about it because it seems to me that's
exactly what a defense clandestine service should be focused on.
There are other priorities here dealing with chem/biodefense and the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency that deal with some of the issues most
in the news today--think of Syria and other problem spots around the
world.
[[Page H3335]]
The key point, Mr. Chairman, is it has taken a lot of work to get to
this point; we have a lot of amendment debate to come. But it is truly
a credit to the staff, to the chairman, to the ranking member of this
committee that something so important, so complex has come to the floor
with such overwhelming bipartisan support. We'll have differences, but
I hope and trust that it will leave the floor in the same way.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlelady from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez), the ranking member on
the Air and Land Subcommittee.
Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California. I want to first begin by
complimenting the chairman of the Tactical Air and Land Forces,
Chairman Mike Turner. He has really been a delight to work with. His
steady and thoughtful leadership has really allowed us to, I believe,
make a good mark in this bill.
Under his leadership, the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee
worked in a very bipartisan fashion. We developed a set of oversight
legislation and funding recommendations that I think really looks at
cutting waste, shaping programs, and making sure that our men and women
in our military are ready to go.
First, the subcommittee's portion of H.R. 1960 supports many of the
high-priority recommendations and desires of the President's budget.
For example, H.R. 1960 provides $8.1 billion for the F-35 Joint Strike
Fighter program, $5.2 billion for Army aviation upgrades, $3.2 billion
for 21 EA-18Gs and F-18 upgrades, $1.4 billion for the V-22, and $1.3
billion for the U.S. Marine Corps ground equipment.
In addition, the Armed Services Committee increased funding in some
parts of the DOD budget that came from the President where we felt that
there were inadequate funds. Specifically, the bill provides an
additional $400 million for the National Guard and Reserve equipment
account and adds funding for an additional F-100 engines by $165
million, and increases advanced procurement funding for 29 Navy F-18
aircraft by $75 million.
{time} 1750
Beyond these funding increases, I want to point out that we made
reductions--over $463 million worth of reductions--in this funding
bill. It's never easy to reduce or to cut programs, but I think we did
a very good job in making sure that as we move forward we will have the
systems that we need.
Finally, H.R. 1960 includes important oversight legislation,
especially for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, for the ground combat
vehicle, for the individual carbine, the Stryker vehicle, and for body
armor for our men and women of our military.
All of these provisions are good government, and I look forward to
voting for this bill.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Wittman).
Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking Chairman
McKeon for his leadership and Ranking Member Smith for the
extraordinary job that both of you gentlemen have done in bringing this
bill together--bringing people together to make this happen. I also
want to thank the ranking member of the Readiness Subcommittee.
Madeleine Bordallo, thank you so much for your leadership and for your
cooperation to make our effort on the Readiness Subcommittee as
successful as it was.
Today, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1960, the fiscal year 2014
National Defense Authorization Act. While this bill will not fix all of
the Nation's readiness challenges, it does go far in addressing
depleted force readiness levels and associated levels of assumed risk.
Specifically, the bill prohibits the Department from proposing,
planning, or initiating another round of base realignment and closure
commission elements--a measure that's critical, in my view, given the
fiscal uncertainties we face as a Nation.
This bill helps our military members by restoring vital readiness
accounts, such as the Army and Air Force flying programs; increasing
funding for facility sustainment; increasing funding for Army depot
maintenance and rest; increasing funding for ship depot maintenance;
and prohibiting the retirement of amphibs and cruisers the Navy
proposed to retire 10 to 15 years early.
With successive rounds of budget cuts and the disastrous effects of
sequestration, readiness rates remain at historic levels, and these
levels are unacceptably low. Our warfighters are at risk, and we owe it
to them to make sure that we put dollars back to make sure that the
readiness of our Armed Forces does not in any way suffer. We want to
make sure that our men and women have what they need, making sure that
they continue to have overwhelming superiority on the battlefield.
That's what this Nation has always done. It is our obligation to make
sure that that continues.
While we have restored the Air Force and Army flying hours programs
and bolstered facilities sustainment and depot maintenance, we will
need to remain focused on readiness challenges in the months and years
to come. Those readiness challenges will continue. Especially as we
retrograde from Afghanistan and reset our force, we cannot forget the
need to maintain readiness.
As I close, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the members of the
subcommittee and the staff for their unyielding support for the men and
women of our military. Our Nation faces many challenges, as this bill
makes clear.
I want to remind this Chamber that we owe a debt of gratitude to
those who selflessly serve our Nation--those who volunteer to put
themselves in harm's way. That's what makes our Nation great. We owe
them the highest amount of respect in getting this bill done in their
best interest.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from North Carolina, the ranking member on the Seapower
Subcommittee, Mr. McIntyre.
Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the National Defense
Authorization bill, which the Armed Services Committee passed last week
with overwhelming support, and thank my colleagues, Chairman McKeon and
Ranking Member Smith, for their hard work in making sure this
bipartisan measure would be done the right way, and to help our men and
women in uniform.
Specifically, I am pleased that this bill strengthens our national
defense, supports North Carolina military bases with a $355 million
investment in military construction, and makes key investments across
the Nation to help make sure that our servicemen and -women have the
tools they need to do their job.
This measure authorizes $552 billion for national defense spending
and $85.8 billion for overseas contingency operations.
It also supports current law, which mandates an automatic 1.8 percent
annual increase in troop pay, and it rejects proposals to increase some
TRICARE fees or establish new TRICARE fees, which many servicemembers
and veterans have long been concerned about.
I am also pleased that the committee made sexual assault prevention
and prosecution a cornerstone of this legislation. And I am
particularly pleased that this bill includes an amendment authored by
my good friend and colleague across the aisle, Representative Walter
Jones, a fellow North Carolinian, to protect the religious freedom of
military chaplains to be able to close a prayer according to the
dictates of their conscience, faith, and training.
The committee also included an important provision that
Representative Jones and I both worked together on to require periodic
audits of Berry Amendment contracting compliance by the DOD inspector
general.
I can tell you, as the ranking member of the Seapower and Projection
Forces Subcommittee, I would like to thank my colleague, Chairman Randy
Forbes, for his work on our section of this bill. The Seapower portion
of the bill carefully cuts waste in some programs while also improving
Congress' ability to oversee the DOD. It includes provisions for the
Gerald Ford class aircraft carrier, multiyear procurement language for
E-2D and C-130J aircraft, and several other provisions that provide
additional oversight of important programs, including two of the Navy's
largest unmanned aircraft programs.
[[Page H3336]]
It also gives the DOD permission to begin retirement of some old KC-
135 refueling aircraft that have been in storage for many years. With
the new tanker program--the KC-46A--coming on line, it is ``on cost''
and ``on schedule,'' two phrases that we love to hear, not only in the
committee but also on behalf of our taxpayers. I am glad we are giving
DOD more flexibility in these tough budget times to manage its
inventory of aircraft.
Also, the Seapower portion has $14.3 billion for shipbuilding that
would authorize a total of eight new ships. It authorizes $934 million
of ship construction funding to ensure that the Virginia-class
submarine DDG-1000 class destroyer, DDG-51 class destroyer, and joint
high-speed vessel programs stay on schedule.
With regard to the aircraft programs, this bill fully funds the
administration's request for all major aircraft programs in our
jurisdiction, including the Air Force's new bomber program.
The Seapower portion of this, being on budget and on time, is
something I know that we all can support. It is clear this entire bill
is one that has strong bipartisan support, and I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the military personnel
provisions of H.R. 1960 are the product of an open, bipartisan process.
H.R. 1960 provides our warfighters, veterans, and military families
the care and support they need, deserve, and have earned. Specifically,
this year's proposal reforms the way the Department of Defense must
address sexual assault in the Uniform Code of Military Justice and
provides significant additional support, especially in the form of
dedicated legal assistance and whistleblower protection to victims of
this terrible crime.
In addition, the mark would support the services' requested end
strength while ensuring the Army and the Marine Corps adhere to the
limitation on reductions mandated in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2013.
It reaffirms the committee's commitment to the operational reserves
by requiring minimum notification before deployment or cancellation of
deployment and provides authority to improve the personnel readiness of
the National Guard.
It also requires the Secretary of Defense to review and make
improvements to the Integrated Disability Evaluation System for members
of the Reserve components.
Further, it authorizes transitional compensation and other benefits
for dependents of a servicemember who is separated from the Armed
Forces because of a court-martial and forfeits all pay and benefits.
This bill does not include the request for military retirees to pay
more for health care.
In conclusion, I want to thank Mrs. Davis and her staff for their
contributions and support in this process. I particularly appreciate
the active, informed, and dedicated subcommittee members, supported by
the professional staff. Their recommendations and priorities are
clearly reflected in the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2014.
I urge all my colleagues to support this bill.
{time} 1800
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlelady from California (Mrs. Davis), the ranking member of the
Military Personnel Subcommittee.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. I want to thank my colleagues on the
committee for working together to bring forward a good bill. My thanks,
of course, to Chairman Wilson and to the committee staff for working in
a bipartisan manner.
The bill contains a multitude of provisions to address the issue of
sexual assault; and while it may seem that this year Congress focused
on sexual assault in the military, the reality is that this committee
and its members have been working hard to address this issue, which
demands our attention, for the last several years. This committee has,
once again, put forward a number of proposals; but as much as we would
wish that legislation alone will stop someone from committing a sexual
act, we know that is not the case. It will also not stop the fear of
retaliation, which prevents a number of servicemembers from reporting a
sexual assault.
This problem and how we deal with it has to start and end with those
who wear the uniform, but it is important that we provide them the
tools they need to effectively change the system and, ultimately, the
culture by holding perpetrators accountable and commanders and
prosecutors to the highest standard. Whether through bystander
intervention, command climates that do not tolerate or condone sexual
harassment and innuendo, and appropriate prosecutions and command
actions, our servicemembers are ultimately the change agents who need
to step forward.
This bill also focuses on the dependents and families who have
sacrificed so much as well and who have been the backbone of support
for our servicemembers through over a decade of war. Military families
also bear the scars of war, and many need help as well. I am pleased
that the bill includes a number of provisions to support families,
including a provision that seeks to track the number of dependents who
have taken their own lives by suicide. While the number of suicides for
Active Duty members has increased, we have heard anecdotal evidence
that the same holds true for dependents, and the bill seeks to
determine if the Services can begin to track these individuals as well
so that we can determine the best course of action to also address this
critical problem.
Included are several provisions to address issues within the Reserve
components, including a requirement that members of the Reserve be
provided at least 120 days' notification of their deployments. We have
been in conflict for more than a decade, and it's time that the
Services ensure that, when individuals and units are called to deploy
or if their orders are canceled, they have adequate time to prepare.
I would like to mention, though, Mr. Chairman, that there is one
provision which, I think, could adversely impact the morale, well-
being, good order, and discipline of the force. It is a provision that
extends protections to the actions and speech of servicemembers. In
essence, this provision protects an individual who engages in hateful
or discriminatory speech or action, and a commander may take action
only when actual harm occurs.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Collins of Georgia). The time of the
gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30
seconds.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. So if this language becomes law, a
servicemember could engage in such speech and action for as long as and
as much as desired, and a commander could only act against the
individual when, say, the first shot was taken. I don't believe that
was the author's intent, but I do believe that the language as
currently written could be made to be understood in that fashion.
While I have some concerns with the provisions in the bill, the
overall bill provides many benefits to our troops and their families,
and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land
Forces, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner).
Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, I am here today to speak in favor of the
National Defense Authorization Act, and I am very privileged to serve
as the chairman of the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee.
I first want to begin by thanking Chairman McKeon and Ranking Member
Smith for their support for the provisions in the bill that go to
address the important issue of sexual assault in the military.
Ms. Tsongas and I were tasked by the ranking member and the chairman
to come up with a bipartisan solution. We worked directly with the
staffs of both the ranking member and the chair, and we believe that we
have put provisions in this bill with the full bipartisan support of
the committee, which will end the re-victimization of the victim. We
have a problem of sexual assault in the military, and that
[[Page H3337]]
problem is that the perpetrators feel safe and that the victims feel
insecure and re-victimized. This bill includes provisions of the
Turner-Tsongas BE SAFE Act. It also includes provisions from
Representatives Heck, Walorski, Noem, Castro, Sanchez, and Duckworth.
Basically, this bill will strip commanders of their authority to
dismiss a conviction for a serious offense by a court-martial, and it
significantly limits the commander's ability to modify or dismiss the
sentence determined by a court-martial, but we go even beyond that.
This bill says if you commit a sexual assault, you are out. If you
have an inappropriate relationship between a trainer and a trainee, you
are out. No longer will it be tolerated for someone to commit a sexual
assault and stay in the military. No longer will victims ever have to
passionately tell in a hearing before Congress that they were forced to
salute someone who had committed a sexual assault against them.
We ask for the Department of Defense to convene an independent panel
to review all of the Uniform Code of Military Justice as it applies to
sexual assault so that we can see if there are additional provisions
and reforms that need to be enacted.
I want to thank my ranking member, Loretta Sanchez, on the Tactical
Air and Land Forces Subcommittee. We have worked together to make our
priority that of serving our men and women in uniform in the area of
Afghanistan. Also, we've added over $1.3 billion in the President's
budget that was requested to be authorized to address urgent
operational needs for the warfighter, including counter-improvised
explosive device requirements.
The bill includes support for the production in our Nation's heavy
armored vehicle industrial base by maintaining the minimum sustained
production of upgrade modifications for the Abrams tanks and heavy
improved recovery vehicles.
The committee bill retains the Air Force's Global Hawk Block 30
unmanned intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft to
support the deployed warfighter rather than placing these aircraft in
storage as the Air Force plans to do.
The committee bill also addresses the critical need to reduce the
weight of individual warfighter equipment, improve acquisition
practices used for this gear, and it requires the Secretary of Defense
to assess options for providing personnel protection equipment
specifically fitted for the female warfighter.
Our subcommittee is very proud to look at all of the aspects and ways
that we can support the warfighter. Again, I want to thank the chair
and the ranking member for their steadfast support in addressing the
epidemic issue that we have of sexual assault in the military.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cooper), who is the ranking member on the Strategic
Forces Subcommittee.
Mr. COOPER. I thank my friend and colleague from Washington State for
yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the work of the Strategic Forces
Subcommittee. I would particularly like to thank Chairman Rogers for
his friendship and bipartisan leadership, as well as to thank all of
the members of the subcommittee.
I support the many provisions in the bill that strengthen our
national security.
The bill, for example, maintains a safe, secure and reliable nuclear
arsenal while improving the effective oversight of the National Nuclear
Security Administration's cost assessments, efforts and planning.
The bill supports nuclear nonproliferation efforts, including an
increase of $23 million to reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism and the
spread of nuclear weapons.
The bill increases funding for regional missile defense assets to
protect our deployed forces and allies, including important cooperation
with Israel against short- and medium-range missile threats.
The bill authorizes defense environmental cleanup activities; and,
finally, the bill supports investments in military and space assets.
However, I also should report that I do have reservations about
several provisions in the bill that, in my opinion, undermine national
security and waste taxpayer dollars.
For example, the bill blocks prudent nuclear weapons reductions,
including New START reductions, which would strengthen strategic
stability.
The bill increases funding for nuclear weapons by $220 million over
the President's already generous budget request.
The bill accelerates the funding of the Ground-Based Midcourse
Defense program spending by nearly $250 million, and it jumps to
conclusions about east coast missile defense sites against the best
military advice of our generals.
Finally, the bill changes NNSA health and safety oversight,
undermining the independent oversight of defense nuclear sites related
to worker and public protection as well as increasing the Secretary of
Energy's authority to fire employees without due process.
I look forward, Mr. Chairman, to debating the merits of these and
other provisions of the bill.
{time} 1810
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, the
gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Chairman, as chairman of the Strategic
Forces Subcommittee, I rise in support of H.R. 1960, the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2014.
It's important to understand what this bill does and why it deserves
our support. For example:
It streamlines the acquisition of 14 ground-based intercepters
announced by the Secretary of Defense on March 15, saving the taxpayer
hundreds of millions of dollars;
It ensures that strategic competitors do not gain inadvertent access
to vital systems or information because of reliance on commercial
sitcom providers;
It prohibits the transfer of some missile defense technology to
Russia and strengthens congressional oversight of administration
efforts with regards to U.S.-Russia missile defense cooperation
generally;
It invests in proven and vital systems like the Iron Dome and short-
range rocket defense systems;
It provides significant resources above the President's request for
other Israeli cooperative missile defense programs like Arrow 2, Arrow
3, and the David's Sling weapons system;
It forces efficiencies and prioritization of critical nuclear
modernization programs in the budget of the National Nuclear Security
Administration; and
It implements several initiatives to improve security at the National
Nuclear Security Administration and NSA, and streamlines the process to
terminate DOE employees negligent in their duties at category 1 nuclear
material sites like the Y-12 site.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the full committee chairman, Buck
McKeon, for his leadership this year. Without him, this process would
not have worked nearly as well. And I also want to thank my friend and
colleague, the ranking member from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper), who has been
a great partner in this process.
I urge all of my colleagues to support the bill.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlelady from Guam (Ms. Bordallo), who is the ranking member on the
Readiness Subcommittee.
Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Chairman, I want to say at the onset that I've
enjoyed very much working in a bipartisan manner with the chairman of
the Readiness Subcommittee, Mr. Rob Wittman, also the chair of the full
committee, Mr. McKeon, and the ranking member of the full committee,
Mr. Adam Smith. I want to thank also the committee and professional
staff for the many long hours that they've put into getting this bill
ready.
I rise in strong support of H.R. 1960. This bill works to ensure that
our men and women in uniform are well trained and equipped to defend
our Nation and its allies.
Although this bill represents the hard work and efforts of both the
majority and the minority, I want to highlight the need to resolve
sequestration. I hope that this Congress undertakes serious efforts to
finally fix sequestration with a comprehensive solution. We can avoid
this problem.
[[Page H3338]]
I would like to highlight a few important readiness issues.
The bill provides a 1-year extension of authority for certain pay and
benefits to civilian personnel who are forward deployed, performing
critical operations overseas and in combat zones. We are also requiring
GAO to look into how the furloughs of civilian employees are being
implemented by the Department of Defense to ensure they are implemented
in a fair and equitable manner and to understand the impact on mission
execution.
The bill addresses sustainment issues for two important procurement
programs: the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the LCS. We must understand
the costs associated with the sustainment of these programs over the
long term to make informed decisions about the future of these
programs. The bill also contains a provision that will close loopholes
that allow MSC and Navy to repair an increasing number of ships
overseas.
I am especially pleased to note that this bill puts real resources
into the rebalance of our military toward the Asia-Pacific region. The
bill takes a commonsense approach and rolls back restrictive language
that hampers the obligation and the expenditure of Government of Japan
funds, which is positive for our bilateral relationship with the
Government of Japan. The bill continues the House's consistent position
of support of the realignment of forces in this region.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield the gentlelady an additional 1
minute.
Ms. BORDALLO. We also provide funding for the LCS, continued
development of the next generation long-range strike bomber, and robust
procurement of Virginia class submarines, which are all assets that are
important to our rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region.
However, I am concerned about section 233 in the underlying bill. I
appreciate the intent of this provision. We do need to ensure the
defense of our allies in East Asia. Yet this provision unduly restricts
our combatant commanders from providing support to emerging threats or
supporting other allies in other areas. The provision is unnecessary,
and it negatively impacts our military's readiness. I hope that the
Rules Committee will make my amendment in order to improve the
provision.
Again, I thank my colleagues, and I urge all my colleagues to support
this vitally important bill.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to my friend and
colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection
Forces, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes).
Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.
With Chairman McKeon's and Ranking Member Smith's leadership, I
believe that this bill provides the right authorities and sufficient
resources to demonstrate our resounding and unequivocal support for the
men and women who place their service to country above all things. I
think we could all learn from their service and devotion.
As to the Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee mark, I
continue to be concerned about both the size and composition of our
Navy's fleet. In the 30-year shipbuilding plan, the administration has
indicated a requirement of 306 ships. The 2010 QDR independent panel
indicated a requirement of 346 ships. Unfortunately, the Navy has
proposed a reduction of the fleet to 270 ships in just the next year.
Various outside experts have indicated that if we continue to support
our current level of shipbuilding investments, the fleet could be
reduced further to just 240 ships. This path is simply unacceptable.
Given the budget cuts of the past 4 years, which I opposed, I think
this bill does a good job of reversing some of these negative trends
and takes a step in the right direction by authorizing eight combat
ships and ensuring that we retain and modernize our current fleet to
the end of their service life.
I remain very pleased with the direction of our projection forces.
This bill provides strategic Air Force investments in terms of both the
KC-46A tanker program and the Long-Range Strike Bomber. These are
critical capabilities that need to be nurtured carefully.
This mark also includes important cost-saving initiatives that
provide the Navy and Air Force with the ability to procure E-2D Hawkeye
and C-130H Super Hercules aircraft using multiyear procurement
authority. These legislative provisions alone are projected to save
taxpayers over $1 billion.
As I look to the future, I believe that it's essential to ensure
strategy drives our debate.
Mr. Chairman, we've gone a long ways to reverse some of these
negative trends. I think this bill does a good job of supporting our
forces, and I would urge my colleagues to support this bill.
I thank my colleague and friend, Mike McIntyre, my ranking member,
and our hardworking staff for their efforts in producing this bill.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, could you please let us know
how much time is remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Washington has 12\1/2\ minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from California has 11 minutes remaining.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlelady from Massachusetts (Ms. Tsongas), who is the ranking member
on the Oversight Investigation Committee and also has done fabulous
work on the sexual assault legislation contained in this bill.
Ms. TSONGAS. Mr. Chairman, this year's NDAA takes unprecedented steps
to address a disturbing prevalence of sexual assault in the military,
and I want to thank Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, Congressman
Wilson, and Congresswoman Davis for including these provisions in the
bill. I'd also like to thank my cochair of the Military Sexual Assault
Prevention Caucus, Congressman Mike Turner.
In recent months, we have seen reports rise, military commanders and
supervisors abuse their authority, and officers in charge of sexual
assault prevention efforts allegedly commit the crimes they were sworn
to stop. This is a systemic problem, and the NDAA takes real
consequential actions in response.
This NDAA begins to reform the power of a military commander, the
first major bipartisan effort in decades to make such a significant
change on the command structure.
{time} 1820
Commanders will no longer have the authority to dismiss court-martial
convictions for serious offenses, including sexual assault, and are
prohibited from reducing guilty findings for serious offenses. It makes
sure that those who are convicted of sexual assault will, at a minimum,
be dishonorably discharged or dismissed. And this bill continues our
push to provide victims of sexual assault with access to legal counsel,
which is a critical step in the process of creating an environment that
encourages victims to report these crimes and in bringing those
responsible to justice.
These, and others, are significant reforms that offer considerable
momentum toward changing the deeply rooted and flawed culture that has
allowed these crimes to pervade our Armed Forces. We are making
progress, but there is a long way to go.
Last year's bill established a nine-member independent review panel
to evaluate the systems used to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate
sexual assault crimes under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The
members of this panel are just getting to work now, and their input, 1
year from now, will be invaluable in making sure that Congress
continues its work to make the best reforms possible and end the
scourge of sexual assault.
I look forward to continuing to work with many Members in both
Chambers, the victims who have bravely come forward, and the committed
military leaders who are all meaningfully contributing to this debate
to ensure that this issue can never again be disregarded or ignored.
I also want to take a moment to highlight the important work that
this bill advances to develop superior, lightweight body armor for our
servicemembers. While the ceramic plates which our servicemembers
insert into their tactical vests have always provided the requisite
level of protection in Iraq and Afghanistan, they are unfortunately
[[Page H3339]]
still too heavy and are causing an epidemic of musculoskeletal injuries
among servicemembers, which the VA will be paying for over decades to
come.
Last year, the NDAA contained language requiring the continued
development of body armor systems for female servicemembers, as the
legacy systems fit poorly.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentlelady.
Ms. TSONGAS. Lightweight body armor that hadn't been designed for
female members put female soldiers at greater risk in the field. This
year's bill requires the Secretary of Defense to submit a comprehensive
R&D strategy for lightweight body armor to Congress. I believe this is
an important step, and I thank Air and Land Subcommittee Chair Turner
and Ranking Member Sanchez for their work on this matter.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Alabama (Mrs. Roby), my friend and colleague, the chairman of the
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of H.R. 1960,
and I would like to thank my chairman and the ranking member and all of
the subcommittee chairmen and ranking members for all of the hard work
that has gone into this bill. This is a strong, bipartisan bill that
properly funds our military. It provides for our men and women in
uniform and their families, while ensuring that our warfighters have
the necessary equipment and provisions to continue to ensure our
Nation's security.
I am honored to chair the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee
of the House Armed Services Committee. I am pleased to have as my
colleague and ranking member Ms. Tsongas of Massachusetts.
The world has changed tremendously in the past decade. It remains a
dangerous place, but in new and challenging ways. For this reason, H.R.
1960 takes into account the threats this Nation faces today and the
forces that we must maintain in response. The members of the House
Armed Services Committee are united in the belief that we must not
return to the days of a ``hollow'' military decried by General Edward
``Shy'' Meyer 33 years ago.
Indeed, H.R. 1960 addresses part of our military's current readiness
crisis. It restores funding so planes can take flight, ships can sail,
and our military can train at the pace and scope that's necessary. This
bill responsibly responds to the global conditions, but does so within
this Nation's fiscal constraints.
H.R. 1960 also ensures that, as Afghan forces assume an incredibly
large role in Afghanistan's defense, preserving the safety and security
of Afghan women will be among our priorities. It includes important
provisions so that the Department of Defense understands the lessons of
Benghazi and organizes its forces to preclude or better respond to a
similar attack. This year's National Defense Authorization Act
maintains that the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay is being
funded, operated, and managed properly; and it also provides the
necessary guidance relating to Iran, North Korea, and Syria.
I'm proud to represent two distinguished military installations,
Maxwell Air Force Base and Fort Rucker, and I'm mindful of the
important role these and all other installations around the world play
in ensuring the defense of this great Nation.
In light of the strong provisions included in H.R. 1960 and the
collaborative, bipartisan sentiments upon which it rests, I join my
colleagues in urging support for the National Defense Authorization
Act.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding, and I
would like to thank and congratulate him and Chairman McKeon and their
outstanding staffs for first-rate work and leadership on this issue.
This bill is an example of a properly resourced and properly thought-
out plan that would serve the interests of those who serve us. As we
meet tonight, there are America's best sons and daughters stationed
around the world in dangerous and often lonely places who are defending
our freedom and doing us proud every single day. I do believe this
budget plan is one that gives them the tools and the support that they
need. It has many good things to recommend it.
But I wish it were actually going to take effect, because the fact of
the matter is unless this Congress acts, this plan will never take
effect. Instead, it will be about $50 billion shy of the resources that
we're going to debate and vote on this week.
Mr. Chairman, I think the whole House would be well-served by
following the example by which this legislation was put together. Led
by Chairman McKeon and Mr. Smith, there was open, transparent,
substantive dialogue throughout this process. Members on both sides of
the aisle met for--my goodness, was it 16 hours, 18 hours, it seemed
like longer, and any idea that any Member had was brought to the body,
was vigorously debated, and either approved or disapproved. There was
an open process that led to a good piece of legislation.
This is exactly the opposite of what we've done on the sequestration
problem. There have been backroom meetings. There have been high-level
discussions, and absolutely nothing has happened. This, frankly, is a
bipartisan responsibility of a national problem.
I think that what is incumbent upon us doing here is the budget that
has passed this Chamber and the budget that has passed the other body
should be brought to a conference, and our body should select our
conferees, and I'm sure the other body will select its, and they will
thrash out this process and, I hope, come to a resolution of this
mindless, harmful sequestration process.
About a third of our Navy and Air Force planes aren't flying training
missions because of sequestration. There's intelligence training for
intelligence units throughout the services not being done because of
sequestration. Important research and development, deferred maintenance
on our capital stock, isn't being done because of this problem.
We have spent hours in this Chamber accusing each other of whose
fault it is that we are in this box. I, frankly, think the American
people are tired of hearing whose fault it is and are ready to see this
problem resolved.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman.
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend.
The way to solve this problem is to emulate the example Chairman
McKeon and Mr. Smith have given us: have a fair, transparent, open
process; debate the issues; make some difficult choices. There are
other difficult choices yet to make because of the amendments that are
forthcoming.
When the Members are given the chance to act in regular order, we can
solve problems. Let's have that full and open debate on sequestration;
and some day the plan that we're going to pass this week will actually
take effect.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from
South Dakota (Mrs. Noem), my friend and colleague and a member of the
Armed Services Committee.
Mrs. NOEM. I thank the chairman for leading and for all of his hard
work on this very important bill that we have on the floor today.
Mr. Chairman, the number is staggering: 26,000. That's how many
military members were sexually assaulted last year alone; and thousands
more were unwilling to come forward. Since 2010, there has been a 35
percent increase in military sexual assault.
{time} 1830
This is a disturbing trend that needs to be stopped, and I would like
to thank the chairman for working with me and for many other members on
the committee to do just exactly that.
There's no doubt that our military is the strongest and most capable
force in the world. The men and women who voluntarily step up to serve
and to defend this country know full well that they will be called,
potentially, to serve in times of danger. But they
[[Page H3340]]
should never, under any circumstances, feel threatened in one another's
presence. For many, the military is an extension of family, and nothing
hurts more than being hurt or let down by one of your own.
Last week, the House Armed Services Committee passed the 2014
National Defense Authorization Act by an overwhelming vote of 59-2. I
was proud to support the bill in committee. It takes important steps to
address the rise of sexual assault in our military, including several
provisions that I authored. These provisions will improve military
sexual assault investigations. They will also standardize sexual
assault prevention training programs, and require the Pentagon to
increase scrutiny of those selected that will fill sexual assault
prevention positions in the military, necessary reforms that need to
get done.
For years, lawmakers, military officials, and civilians, alike, have
discussed the need to bring an end to sexual assault. I see a real
opportunity with this bill to put those words into action, to take
meaningful steps to address this growing problem.
It's time to say, once and for all, that sexual assault ends now. In
order to do that, we need to ensure that there are adequate protections
in place that encourage the reporting of sexual assaults without fear
of reprisal or further abuse from peers. We must provide support for
victims and insist on swift punishment for those responsible.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the National Defense
Authorization Act of 2014 and, again, I want to congratulate the
chairman and the ranking member and the committee staff for a process
that was really a breath of fresh air in this Congress--a long meeting,
lots of hot debates and passionate debates, many opportunities,
frankly, for the polarization that seems to dominate this Congress to
break down the process.
But at the end of the day, we had a strong vote, 59-2, obviously very
bipartisan, and we came together as a committee to make sure that core
functions of the government, our national defense are, in fact, going
to be advanced. In particular, I want to focus for a moment on the
bipartisan effort made in the Seapower and Projection Force
Subcommittee to support our Nation's shipbuilding priorities.
This bill supports the President's budget request for continued
projection of two Virginia-class submarines in 2014, building on our
efforts last year to restore a boat that had been removed from the
shipbuilding plan. This measure also continues investment in critical
undersea capabilities, such as the replacement of our SSBN fleet and
the Virginia Payload Module.
In particular, and also, the bill supports construction of eight
battle force ships, four littoral combat ships, a DDG 51 destroyer, as
well as continued work on a new aircraft carrier and vital seapower
programs. To put that in context, the build rate in 2006 was only four
battle force ships; in 2008, it was only three battle force ships.
As we have heard firsthand in our subcommittee, a stable,
predictable, and robust shipbuilding plan is the best way to ensure
that our taxpayers are getting cost-effective ships with the block
grant fixed price model that is producing ships ahead of schedule and
below price. I know this is an issue that our panel will continue to
look at closely as we move forward.
In 2011, in Libya, we saw firsthand the value of a strong Naval
force, where Operation Odyssey Dawn used seapower to wipe out the air
defense system of Muammar Qadhafi. Again, using surface ships and
submarines firing Tomahawk missiles, in a matter of hours we had
advanced the cause for our NATO allies to finish up the work. So this
is, again, critical to the refocus of our naval and strategic plan in
Asia-Pacific and the Middle East.
Again, we need a strong shipbuilding plan and naval force structure,
which this bill will provide strong resources, again, far greater than
in past years.
So, again, I want to close by saluting the chairman's tremendous work
and our staff, in terms of making sure that both sides of the aisle
came together to protect core functions of our government, which,
again, the Seapower Subcommittee, in particular, will advance.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman
from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), my friend and colleague, and a member of
the Armed Services Committee.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman of the
House Armed Services Committee for yielding me time. I also want to
thank him for his tremendous leadership, and Mr. Smith, as well, in
crafting a bill that brings solutions to combat sexual violence in the
Armed Forces.
This bill includes a provision that I authored with Congresswoman
Loretta Sanchez to encourage victims to step out of the darkness. The
provision specifically identifies reports of sexual assault as a form
of communication under whistleblower protections. It ensures that
victims cannot face reprisal for reporting acts of sexual assault.
Sexual violence has reached epidemic proportions and is eroding the
foundations of trust that our military traditions have been built upon.
I had the privilege to visit our troops in Afghanistan and stand
shoulder-to-shoulder with the finest military in the world. Hearing
their concerns on this issue firsthand typifies the horrific reality of
this situation.
Mr. Chairman, there were an estimated 26,000 cases of military sexual
assault last year alone, with only 3,600 victims reporting. It's
reported that 62 percent of those who have been assaulted went on to
experience some form of retaliation.
Citing these facts and figures does not attest to the victims and the
real-life faces of this problem. We're talking about our sons and
daughters. We are talking about our brothers and sisters.
In Indiana, a brave woman named Lisa Wilken, an Air Force veteran,
came forward to share her own story of repetitive sexual abuse that she
suffered during her military career. After being raped, she reported
the incident to the Air Force. Her description of the reporting process
was chilling. Whistleblower protections like what I'm talking about
today will create an environment for safe reporting so that victims
like Lisa can come forward and demand justice.
For the troops who've been victimized while serving their country and
the countless Americans who some day want to serve in this great
military, I ask that we do the right thing. It's time for this Congress
to do the right thing, and it's time for this Congress to act. I ask my
colleagues to join me in supporting this bill and the thoughtful
reforms contained within.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of
my time.
I just, again, want to emphasize how important this piece of
legislation is, and the work that goes into it.
And all the Members have said this is the way legislation is supposed
to work. It really does work when you do the legislative process, when
you have committee hearings and you debate amendments and you put
together a product.
And also to remind folks how important this piece of legislation is.
It funds and supports our military in providing for the national
security of this country. It is critically important that we pass it
and get it done.
I do also, however, want to emphasize the point that Mr. Andrews
made, and that is that, unfortunately, unless we do something about
sequestration, this bill is going to be largely undone. Taking $50
billion out of this budget in a meat-ax fashion will not be helpful. We
have to do something about sequestration if we're going to be able to
protect this process.
So I would urge the full body to follow the example of the Armed
Services Committee: get together, work out a bipartisan solution to
make sure that we can protect this work and not just the national
security.
Sequestration obviously affects all parts of government in a very,
very negative way; infrastructure, education, health care all
jeopardized by the sequestration legislation. So I would urge us to
deal with that.
But, in the meantime, I thank the chairman and I thank all the
members and the staff for the great work that they've done in putting
together this bill, and I urge support.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McKEON. Might I inquire how much time we have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 4\1/2\ minutes.
[[Page H3341]]
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of the time.
At this time, I'd like to thank Mr. Smith. This is our third bill
that we've worked on in these positions, and I think we've become
better friends over the years. We understand each other. We know that
we, at times, will have disagreements.
I have to confess, I've been married now 50 years, and my wife and I
have had a couple of disagreements. I was always wrong, and she's stood
by me, and we've had a great relationship.
And we have a great relationship working in this committee. Likewise,
our staff. I think they have done yeoman's work to get us to this
point. And our subcommittee chairmen and ranking members that we've
heard speak here today.
And I have to agree with Mr. Smith on the sequestration.
{time} 1840
We, I think, all understand that this is bad for our Nation. We voted
on it, those of us who did, knowing that, understanding that it would
never happen. Well, reality set in, and it happened. I've had a few
people come to me and say, gee, sequestration isn't that bad. They
really haven't seen the full impact to this point. We're just starting
into the first year of sequestration. And I was meeting with General
Breedlove today, our new European commander. And he's just a month into
his new job, and he's starting to feel the sequestration.
I think what we need to understand is--and I've talked to each of our
military leaders as they came in and secretaries as they came before
our committee for the hearings that led up to this bill--that if
something doesn't happen between now and September 30, all of this
work, everything that we're working on is, as Mr. Smith has pointed
out, going away. We are cutting $487 billion out of defense over the
next 10 years. That's in the bill. We also, through sequestration, cut
another $500 billion out of defense over the next 10 years. That is not
reflected in--this year's portion is not reflected in this bill. Our
Budget Committee in the House passed a budget, and they kept the top
line number from the Budget Control Act of $967 billion, and they gave
us additional money for defense, which we've used in this bill. But if
we're not able to resolve the differences between us and the Senate on
September 30, it will be like Cinderella and that magic shoe.
Everything goes away. The carriage becomes a cantaloupe, or a pumpkin,
and it's bad times.
We've got to deal with that, we've got to deal with raising the debt
limit, and there are a lot of very serious things on the table. So I
would encourage all of our colleagues to join in the debate tomorrow.
We had a great debate in committee. We had differences, and we talked
about them. We didn't get personal, and we didn't get rancorous. We
came out with a vote of 59-2 because everybody on this committee
understands how important our work is, how important our national
defense is, and how important the men and the women and their families
in uniform are, and we stand behind them. Now we do need to make sure
that we have the resources that they need.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I would encourage all of us to support this
bill tomorrow. Join in the process. Make it a better bill if we can.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Griffith of Virginia) having assumed the chair, Mr. Collins of Georgia,
Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the
Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the
bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for
military activities of the Department of Defense and for military
construction, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
____________________